{"id":129530,"date":"2006-02-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-02-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-das-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-23-february-2006"},"modified":"2017-10-18T12:16:13","modified_gmt":"2017-10-18T06:46:13","slug":"puran-das-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-23-february-2006","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-das-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-23-february-2006","title":{"rendered":"Puran Das vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 23 February, 2006"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Puran Das vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 23 February, 2006<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: A Pasayat<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Arijit Pasayat, Tarun Chatterjee<\/div>\n<pre>           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  5024-5025 of 1998\n\nPETITIONER:\nPuran Das\t\t\t\t\t\t \t\t\n\nRESPONDENT:\nUnion of India &amp; Ors.\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 23\/02\/2006\n\nBENCH:\nARIJIT PASAYAT &amp; TARUN CHATTERJEE\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>J U D G M E N T<\/p>\n<p>ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThese appeals are interlinked and are disposed of by this common<br \/>\njudgment.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tAppellant challenges the judgments of a Division Bench of the<br \/>\nHimachal Pradesh High Court at Shimla holding that the appellant was<br \/>\nnot entitled to the benefit of promotion from the date his juniors were<br \/>\ngranted promotion.  The appellant&#8217;s case was that he was deprived of the<br \/>\nopportunity of acquiring the requisite qualification for promotion as he<br \/>\nwas initially placed under suspension and subsequently removed from<br \/>\nservice.  After reinstatement he qualified at the requisite tests and on the<br \/>\nbasis of such qualification he shall be deemed to have acquired the right<br \/>\nto be considered along with his juniors when the consideration was<br \/>\nmade.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe factual background is as follows:-\n<\/p>\n<p>\tAppellant joined the Indo-Tibetan Border Police Force as a<br \/>\nConstable on 7.1.1967.  In 1969 he was promoted as Head Constable.<br \/>\nOn 11.9.1973 he was suspended from service as a criminal case was<br \/>\nregistered against him.  He was subsequently acquitted in that criminal<br \/>\ncase.  During the period of suspension, appellant was directed to stay at<br \/>\nTaradevi and not to leave the Headquarters.  On 25.10.1974 his<br \/>\napplication for station leave was rejected and he was directed to stay at<br \/>\nTaradevi. Notice was given to him for proposing disciplinary action for<br \/>\nnot reporting at Taradevi.  After enquiry the appellant was held guilty of<br \/>\ncharge of deserting the services during the period of suspension. On<br \/>\n14.2.1976  show-cause notice was issued to the appellant to show-cause<br \/>\nas to why the punishment of removal from service shall not be imposed<br \/>\nupon him.  By order dated 1.3.1976, the appellant was ordered to be<br \/>\nremoved from service.  By order dated 24.4.1976 the appeal was rejected<br \/>\nby the appellate authority.  The appellant filed Civil Writ Petition<br \/>\nNo.324\/1976 in the High Court praying for the quashing of the aforesaid<br \/>\norder of removal from service.  As noted above, appellant was acquitted<br \/>\nin the criminal case by judgment dated 31.5.1979.  The High Court<br \/>\nallowed the writ petition by order dated 4.1.1983 and directed that all<br \/>\nconsequential reliefs be given to the appellant.  On 8.2.1983, an order<br \/>\nwas passed to reinstate the appellant in service with all consequential<br \/>\nreliefs with arrears of salary.  In March, 1984 the appellant qualified<br \/>\nRadio Operator Grade II test and in June 1986 he qualified in the Grade I<br \/>\ntest. He became eligible for departmental promotion test i.e. &#8216;D&#8217; test<br \/>\nsubsequently. Representation was made by the appellant to the<br \/>\nconcerned authorities for granting relief in terms of the High Court&#8217;s<br \/>\norders.  The same was not accepted by the concerned authorities.  The<br \/>\nappellant again filed the C.W.P. No.16\/1987 in the High Court for grant<br \/>\nof consequential reliefs.  On 18.9.1987 during the pendency of the writ<br \/>\npetition respondents 5 to 9 were promoted.  According to the appellant<br \/>\nthey were junior in service to the appellant. Civil Writ Petition No.562\/87<br \/>\nwas filed by the appellant challenging promotion given to respondents 5<br \/>\nto 9.  The High Court partly allowed CWP No.562\/87, declining the claim<br \/>\nof promotion from the date his junior were promoted on the basis that<br \/>\nunder the relevant rules the appellant had qualified at the test in 1986<br \/>\nonly. Appellant had highlighted that some of the persons who were<br \/>\ngranted promotion had not qualified in all the tests and the appellant<br \/>\nwas prevented from qualifying at the test because he was placed under<br \/>\nsuspension and\/or dismissed. The High Court held that since the<br \/>\nappellant did not possess requisite qualification for promotion at the time<br \/>\nof consideration for promotion,  his claim for promotion from the date his<br \/>\njuniors were granted promotion cannot be accepted. In CWP. No.16 of<br \/>\n1987, the High Court granted reliefs with which the present appeals have<br \/>\nno direct nexus. But the prayer for promotion from earlier point of time<br \/>\nwas rejected. In CWP No.562 of 1987 that was the essential prayer, as<br \/>\nthe relief sought for was promotion from the date his juniors were given<br \/>\npromotion.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIn support of the appeals, learned counsel for the appellant<br \/>\nsubmitted that the approach of the High Court is clearly erroneous.<br \/>\nStrong reliance was placed on a decision of this Court in <a href=\"\/doc\/772919\/\">C.O. Arumugam<br \/>\nand Ors. v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors.<\/a> (1991 Supp. 2 SCC 199) more<br \/>\nparticularly para 5 thereof.  It was submitted that by the acts of the<br \/>\nrespondent the appellant was deprived of the opportunity to appear at<br \/>\nthe concerned test.  The order of removal has been set aside by the High<br \/>\nCourt and consequential benefits were directed to be given.  The right to<br \/>\nbe considered for promotion was one of the consequential benefits which<br \/>\nflows from the order of the High Court.  The appellant could not appear<br \/>\nin the test as he was under suspension, and  that cannot be a ground to<br \/>\ndeny him promotion.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIn response, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that at<br \/>\nthe time of consideration for promotion, the appellant did not possess the<br \/>\nrequisite qualification and, therefore, the High Court was right in<br \/>\njustifying in revising the benefits claimed.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tStrong reliance was placed as noted supra by learned counsel for<br \/>\nthe appellant on para 5 of Arumugam&#8217;s case (supra). It reads as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;5. As to the merits of the matter, it is necessary to<br \/>\nstate that every civil servant has a right to have his<br \/>\ncase considered for promotion according to his turn<br \/>\nand it is a guarantee flowing from Articles 14 and 16(1)<br \/>\nof the Constitution. The consideration of promotion<br \/>\ncould be postponed only on reasonable grounds. To<br \/>\navoid arbitrariness, it would be better to follow certain<br \/>\nuniform principles. The promotion of persons against<br \/>\nwhom charge has been framed in the disciplinary<br \/>\nproceedings or charge-sheet has been filed in criminal<br \/>\ncase may be deferred till the proceedings are<br \/>\nconcluded. They must, however, be considered for<br \/>\npromotion if they are exonerated or acquitted from the<br \/>\ncharges. If found suitable, they shall then be given the<br \/>\npromotion with retrospective effect from the date on<br \/>\nwhich their juniors were promoted.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe aforesaid decision has no relevance so far as the present case<br \/>\nis concerned.  Undisputedly, at the point of time when the consideration<br \/>\nwas made the appellant was not qualified.  The written and the practical<br \/>\ntests were held by the concerned authorities in July and August, 1975<br \/>\nfor the promotion of Head Constables (W\/T) to the rank of JIO (W\/T)<br \/>\nvacancies.  Under the promotion order 33 persons were promoted on ad<br \/>\nhoc basis and were brought on approved list &#8216;D&#8217; with stipulation that<br \/>\nthey would clear the practical test.  The persons whose promotion was<br \/>\ncited as illustration by the appellant stood at a different footing. Head<br \/>\nConstable Ved Prakash was promoted on regular basis and Raghubir<br \/>\nSingh and V.P. Nautiyal were promoted on ad hoc basis against the<br \/>\nunqualified cadre and they were directed to clear the practical test within<br \/>\n12 months failing which they were liable to be reversed.  The appellant<br \/>\ncould not be considered for promotion as he did not have the basic<br \/>\nqualification under the India-Tibetan Border Police (Non-Gazetted<br \/>\nTelecommunication Cadre) Rules, 1983 (in short the &#8216;Rules&#8217;).  The<br \/>\nappellant had qualified Grade II test and Grade I test in March 1984 and<br \/>\nJune 1986 respectively.  He became eligible for promotion test i.e. &#8220;D&#8221; list<br \/>\ntest and became qualified subsequently.  The question of giving any<br \/>\nretrospective effect to his qualification is clearly impermissible.  In C.O.<br \/>\nArumugam&#8217;s case (supra)  the factual position was different.  The<br \/>\npersons whose cases were not considered, had already qualified and in<br \/>\nthat background this Court held that they were entitled to be considered<br \/>\nfrom an anterior point of time.  That logic is not applicable in the present<br \/>\ncase, as admittedly the appellant did not possess the requisite<br \/>\nqualification on the date of consideration.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tAbove being the position the appeals are clearly devoid of merit,<br \/>\ndeserve dismissal which we direct.  No costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Puran Das vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 23 February, 2006 Author: A Pasayat Bench: Arijit Pasayat, Tarun Chatterjee CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 5024-5025 of 1998 PETITIONER: Puran Das RESPONDENT: Union of India &amp; Ors. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 23\/02\/2006 BENCH: ARIJIT PASAYAT &amp; TARUN CHATTERJEE JUDGMENT: J U D G [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-129530","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Puran Das vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 23 February, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-das-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-23-february-2006\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Puran Das vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 23 February, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-das-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-23-february-2006\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2006-02-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-10-18T06:46:13+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-das-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-23-february-2006#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-das-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-23-february-2006\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Puran Das vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 23 February, 2006\",\"datePublished\":\"2006-02-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-10-18T06:46:13+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-das-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-23-february-2006\"},\"wordCount\":1319,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-das-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-23-february-2006#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-das-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-23-february-2006\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-das-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-23-february-2006\",\"name\":\"Puran Das vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 23 February, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2006-02-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-10-18T06:46:13+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-das-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-23-february-2006#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-das-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-23-february-2006\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-das-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-23-february-2006#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Puran Das vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 23 February, 2006\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Puran Das vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 23 February, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-das-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-23-february-2006","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Puran Das vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 23 February, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-das-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-23-february-2006","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2006-02-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-10-18T06:46:13+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-das-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-23-february-2006#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-das-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-23-february-2006"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Puran Das vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 23 February, 2006","datePublished":"2006-02-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-10-18T06:46:13+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-das-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-23-february-2006"},"wordCount":1319,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-das-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-23-february-2006#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-das-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-23-february-2006","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-das-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-23-february-2006","name":"Puran Das vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 23 February, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2006-02-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-10-18T06:46:13+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-das-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-23-february-2006#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-das-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-23-february-2006"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/puran-das-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-23-february-2006#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Puran Das vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 23 February, 2006"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/129530","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=129530"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/129530\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=129530"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=129530"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=129530"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}